This may be the last time you can vote on Facebook’s policy changes

Facebook wants to take away its site-wide votes, puts the decision to a vote.

The gates are open on what may be Facebook’s last sitewide vote, according to a post at its site governance page. Facebook proposed a round of changes to its data use policy and statement of rights and responsibilities, one of which will remove the site’s self-imposed need to alert users and solicit their feedback on changes if they are of the legal or administrative kind.

In addition to removing the feedback solicitation and votes, Facebook is also giving itself permission to share data with its affiliate companies. This also allows it to communicate data between the US and European contingents of Facebook. This clause will free Facebook from having to keep its Instagram data separate, which Facebook has been doing since it acquired the startup earlier this year.

The changes in the data use policy include a reminder that hiding a post on a timeline is not the same as deleting it; the hidden element may still appear in the news feeds of the intended audience. Another subtle language change now prevents users from using their personal Facebook profiles for their own “commercial gain”; instead, they must use a Facebook Page for such purposes.

Facebook first announced that it would implement a democratic process to policy changes in 2009 and that a 30 percent voter turnout would make the results of those votes binding. Two votes have since been held, the first with over 600,000 votes cast and the second with 342,000, the latter out of a scant 900 million users. Based on that history, it’s safe to guess that the required 300 million Facebook users won’t rally and vote against the removal of their vote.

37 Reader Comments

I think requiring 30% of the users to make it binding is a ridiculous figure; particularly when people frequently make double-accounts (one for work, one personal), or make accounts for their dogs, or children. But it's not my company, so I suppose I'll be de-activating my account.

Given that the requirement is 30% of accounts need to vote for a vote to count and (significantly) less than 1% of people voted, I think it's reasonable to kill the voting. (OTOH, it would also be reasonable to leave voting in place and treat the voting period as simply a longer notification period and look consumer friendly).

Maybe Facebook should have implemented voter registration procedures before putting "voting based off of their total user base" into place. Just because there's 900 million users registered on Facebook doesn't mean that there's 900 million people who are actively using the site.

As before, facebook does not promote any of the votes, nor do they make it very easy to even engage in the process. They never really took voting seriously, and basically used it to help appease privacy concerns without actually having to do anything about those concerns. Pretty much business as usual.

The 30% requirement meant that from day 1 the voting system was a big farce. A good percentage of the accounts on Facebook are fakes and even more are old abandoned accounts. Do we really need the vote from all of the fake accounts the gold farmers set up for Farmville or whatnot?

I, too, think that the 30% figure needed is ridiculously high. The only thing that can be done, seeing as Facebook don't seem to want to publicise this, is to publicise it for them. The more people that know, the better. To that end, I've just emailed the BBC and local commercial TV newsdesks with the relevant links and a short explanation. Let's see if the word CAN be spread...

The 30% requirement meant that from day 1 the voting system was a big farce. A good percentage of the accounts on Facebook are fakes and even more are old abandoned accounts. Do we really need the vote from all of the fake accounts the gold farmers set up for Farmville or whatnot?

Facebook: Your Virtual Banana Republic!

The voting numbers would mean a whole lot more if the percentage of users voting was based on "active users" that have visited the site in the last month. I have to imagine that 900M number is at least one half dormant accounts.

Hell, I found an account when some email setting reverted during one of their policy changes and I started getting all manner of "find your friends" messages from them. I have another that was opened just to tinker with their app stuff, and two others created for testing some WordPress integration thing. In total, I have login information for at least 8 accounts, zero of which are used regularly - none of those should be counted in determining "voter turnout" numbers.

Not that it matters at all (since there is no way that there will be enough votes), but apparently if you select the option to share with your friends when voting, the item posted to your wall has its privacy options changed automatically to "share only with me". This was just reported to me by a coworker (had already voted, so I can't test it myself anymore).

Most people don't even seem to be aware Facebook is making these changes.

Those who are hit the link in FB's e-mail or on their page, see the same post in 15 different languages on the stupid timeline, and still don't see any link where they can actually cast their vote.

Once you do learn you have to go to the "Documents" link to vote, you still have to pick which of the unclearly worded documents it is, then scroll to the bottom where the link is highly NOT obvious which one is the vote...

I think requiring 30% of the users to make it binding is a ridiculous figure; particularly when people frequently make double-accounts (one for work, one personal), or make accounts for their dogs, or children. But it's not my company, so I suppose I'll be de-activating my account.

I joined 2009 only to read some company information made available just there, thank you very much. Two years after, I followed the prescribed procedure to have my account deleted. I'm sure, all my data is still there today. It's a truly detestable business, only there to collect monetiseable user data while selling its use as freedom.

The fact that you can't vote without enabling a 3rd party app should probably make the results null. What about people who have Apps, Plugins, and Websites turned off?

That's exactly what I posted at the official facebook page. Considering that privacy settings for third party websites are also linked to using ANY app connected to facebook (including their own official app), then those who are more cautious about their privacy settings (ie: most people involved with voting on this) won't be inclined to use the app to vote.

Another subtle language change now prevents users from using their personal Facebook profiles for their own “commercial gain”; instead, they must use a Facebook Page for such purposes.

What they are saying, in effect, is that only corporations are allowed to buy and sell their services, not people, and there will be an as yet to be mentioned punishment for breaking that rule (otherwise, there would be no need for the rule).

The whole idea of a service such as Facebook being some form of democracy is an insulting fiction. It was absurd to start with. It's absurd now. So quit pretending. Facebook (and every other company) is going to do whatever is best for it. Customers can (and should) do what's best for them. You can "vote" with your decisions about which services to use. Getting rid of the sham of user voting is the right thing to do, because it's more honest.

I voted and was surprised to find out that only around 16,000 people voted. That's around 0.0018% of the facebook vote. Since this vote wasn't publicized at all I am guessing they won't even get .5% of people on facebook to vote.

I voted and was surprised to find out that only around 16,000 people voted. That's around 0.0018% of the facebook vote. Since this vote wasn't publicized at all I am guessing they won't even get .5% of people on facebook to vote.

Are you sure there are more than 16,000 people on facebook? And I mean human beings, not what the courts says constitutes a person.

I think requiring 30% of the users to make it binding is a ridiculous figure; particularly when people frequently make double-accounts (one for work, one personal), or make accounts for their dogs, or children. But it's not my company, so I suppose I'll be de-activating my account.

And I'll bet you didn't actually go vote on it, either. Most people don't. Instead, they forward chain posts, "like" each other's comments, and generally do a bunch of useless whining instead of just going and giving feedback. I guess Facebook has got the message- people are willing to complain but not actually help solve anything.It doesn't really affect me though. I maintain a page with minimal information, just so I can have a bit of control over what my actual friends and family post up about me.

If they cared about user opinion they would make the voting more user friendly (visible notification on the main page would be a start) and not require such a huge number to have an effect, it's not like there are 900mil unique users on facebook anyway.

The two choices are to have the site "Governed by the Proposed Documents" or "Governed by the Existing Documents", and finding those documents is not immediately obvious. Don't click wrong, because you can't fix it if you make a mistake.Further, you have to install a 3rd party app (which asks for access to your profile information) to vote!I should also mention it took me a full minute to even find the voting page.

I only mention this in case someone still thinks this is anything but a farce.

I think requiring 30% of the users to make it binding is a ridiculous figure; particularly when people frequently make double-accounts (one for work, one personal), or make accounts for their dogs, or children. But it's not my company, so I suppose I'll be de-activating my account.

And I'll bet you didn't actually go vote on it, either. Most people don't. Instead, they forward chain posts, "like" each other's comments, and generally do a bunch of useless whining instead of just going and giving feedback.

In fact, I did. Like other ARS subscribers, I found it ridiculous that a third-party app was in charge of the vote, as I think that will / would deter many people from voting. When I did, voting to keep the current changes was at several hundred-thousand.

Based on this article (and not on the legalese-filled bullshit FB so helpfully provided, where nothing of use can be found without a fucking magnifying glass), I assume that the sensible option is "Governed by the Existing Documents". That is what should avoid data consolidation among apps, right? I could not find anything about that on the two docs.

I had no idea that Facebook was even doing democratic voting on policy changes until they started talking about getting rid of it, and I use Facebook every day.

Get this: A while back, I went through and changed all my privacy settings so that only my friends could see. I went back in a week ago and found that Facebook had switched me back to public without my knowledge. They also keep wanting me to give them my phone number and address, which is a solid "no."

This is why I'm transitioning all my social media over to G+. Say what you will about Google, but I've never had any privacy issues with them whatsoever, and Google seems to understand how social media works now. The only reason I still maintain a Facebook account is because a few of my friends are Facebook-only, but I don't share anything there anymore.

Google+ is still around? Me and a few of my family members tried to make the switch when it came out, but without a majority buy in it just wasn't happening. G+ has a more confusing interface (although it's pretty easy once you grok it), and fatally, none of the games they were playing. No Words With Friends == No Sale.

Google+ is still around? Me and a few of my family members tried to make the switch when it came out, but without a majority buy in it just wasn't happening. G+ has a more confusing interface (although it's pretty easy once you grok it), and fatally, none of the games they were playing. No Words With Friends == No Sale.

It's actually much improved. The interface is cleaned up, and most games have moved over now (although I can't speak for Words with Friends). Plus, higher adoption rates are making it a more happening place. That's just one man's opinion, though, so take it with a grain of salt.

I see people suggesting a switch to Google Plus but of course Google is also out to compile and monetize your information that it collects across all "free" (in exchange for more user metrics) services. Including but not limited to parsing your email, your plus posts, your search history, your browser cache (if you use Chrome), even who you call w/ Google voice.

Just read their privacy policy and their advertising policy, it's all there. You can opt-out of personalized advertising. Though that just makes you feel less watched on the surface.

Yes, this is true. As weird as it sounds, though, I trust Google more with my information than I do with Facebook. Their approach has been consistent throughout their history, without any major and abrupt behind-the-scenes changes, no data breaches and no revealing of my information to other people (presumably) without my knowledge.

Maybe I'm the minority, but I couldn't care less about any of this, one way or the other. I don't see how it would realistically affect me negatively, except for in principle. And I don't care much about principle. Just how it would *realistically* obstruct me from being able to do what I want.